Fracking, Texas and drought relief

[IGIT]

It's not necessarily right nor wrong. It's rational in an economic sense.

hi OldGoat,

that's a reasonable way to look it. its sort of a "if you can get away with it, why not"? way of looking at things.

let me rephrase my question, then.

does Federal policy of sending "big government" dollars to a state that's parched for water and using what little water remains on fracking make sense to you, from a policy standpoint?

- IGIT

 

[IGIT]

I do agree that it is absurd to continue using the fresh water supply, and the state has no one to blame but themselves. Up here in Canada the water usage in oil and gas operations is highly regulated as it should be.

I dont know how the relief program is set up, does it only apply to an act of god, or does the relief cover man made droughts? Either way i assume they will get the relief they need, but will not learn from it.

agreed, Snackbar.

well said.

- IGIT

 

[emax]

hello Emax,

no one, as far as i know, is panicing in this thread.

we're just talking about whether a state, which is in the midst of a historic drought and parched for water, should be able to jettison vast quantities of their remaining drinkable water in fracking whilst applying for Federal Aid to address their drought.

wouldn't this be a bit akin to giving welfare money to people who have big flatscreen TVs, Iphones, Xboxes and Air Jordans?

- IGIT

You have a fair point there. Since they are asking for federal aid while doing this, I will be willing to join hands with you on this one.

 

[7437]

It's not necessarily right nor wrong. It's rational in an economic sense.

arent you always going on about how welfare bad, and everyone on it is lazy?

 

[IGIT]

arent you always going on about how welfare bad, and everyone on it is lazy?

hi 7437,

yup.

- IGIT

 

[OldGoat]

arent you always going on about how welfare bad, and everyone on it is lazy?

That's true. But is it their fault for taking what we give them? I complain about breeding unnecessary dependency for votes and how the programs aren't intended to do what they say they are intended to do.

 

[7437]

hi 7437,

yup.

- IGIT

so it makes economic sense for corporations to take advantage of welfare from the government, but individuals who play the system for food stamps and disability are destroying America.

 

[7437]

That's true. But is it their fault for taking what we give them? I complain about breeding unnecessary dependency for votes and how the programs aren't intended to do what they say they are intended to do.

and that is different from what these companies are doing how?

 

[OldGoat]

and that is different from what these companies are doing how?

It's not much different. And the companies aren't asking for relief the state is.

You can be taking advantage of programs and have different characteristics. Poor people make dumb decisions and are lazy and need help, by and large. Rich companies make good decisions work hard and opportunistically take help as it's giving. State governments? How can you characterize a state government concisely? Whatever a state government is, a wise state government will take what it can from the feds especially since the feds take what they can from the states.

 

[OldGoat]

so it makes economic sense for corporations to take advantage of welfare from the government, but individuals who play the system for food stamps and disability are destroying America.

At least companies do something productive in the aggregate. But this is about Texas's behavior correct?

 

[ruthless robert]

so it makes economic sense for corporations to take advantage of welfare from the government, but individuals who play the system for food stamps and disability are destroying America.

Do you know what r.o.i. is?

Its Return on Investment

If you allow corporation to have welfare, while i wish it didnt exist, it does create jobs in which people who have those jobs get taxes taken out of their checks and when those employed people buy things with their money they pay tax on whatever they buy.

So for every dollar the government gave a corporation they made back a dollar and fifty cents in taxes then the government actually got a 50% return on their investment. This grows the economy and government.


Now, if u have welfare for people there is no return, its all waste. Yes you may help 25% of those that really need help but 75% of the people are abusing it and its riddled with fraud, lazy people that think they're owed something just because they exist.

When u create a mindset in society that its easier to do nothing then you killed the incentive for the ambitious. This creates decay in society and their productivity. While we do need to help people who actually need it we also need to take a stand against those thats living corruptly off the system.

At least with corporate welfare the government gets a return on their investment..... unless they stupidly invest in something thats not proven, then they lose but if they invest in corporations that create jobs then they get a return on their investment.....

.

 

[7437]

It's not much different. And the companies aren't asking for relief the state is.

You can be taking advantage of programs and have different characteristics. Poor people make dumb decisions and are lazy and need help, by and large. Rich companies make good decisions work hard and opportunistically take help as it's giving. State governments? How can you characterize a state government concisely? Whatever a state government is, a wise state government will take what it can from the feds especially since the feds take what they can from the states.

ok, so the state of Texas has the same faults you attribute to poor people, not corporations.

 

[7437]

At least companies do something productive in the aggregate. But this is about Texas's behavior correct?

ok, so the Fed should tell Texas to piss off then. they want the profits from fracking, they can handle the water shortages it caused.

 

[7437]

Do you know what r.o.i. is?

Its Return on Investment

If you allow corporation to have welfare, while i wish it didnt exist, it does create jobs in which people who have those jobs get taxes taken out of their checks and when those employed people buy things with their money they pay tax on whatever they buy.

So for every dollar the government gave a corporation they made back a dollar and fifty cents in taxes then the government actually got a 50% return on their investment. This grows the economy and government.


Now, if u have welfare for people there is no return, its all waste. Yes you may help 25% of those that really need help but 75% of the people are abusing it and its riddled with fraud, lazy people that think they're owed something just because they exist.

When u create a mindset in society that its easier to do nothing then you killed the incentive for the ambitious. This creates decay in society and their productivity. While we do need to help people who actually need it we also need to take a stand against those thats living corruptly off the system.

At least with corporate welfare the government gets a return on their investment..... unless they stupidly invest in something thats not proven, then they lose but if they invest in corporations that create jobs then they get a return on their investment.....

.

you dont think people on welfare immediately go spend there checks? it isn't like they arent paying taxes, even unemployment gets taxed. every benefit that a corporation gives by the Fed handing out cash applies to people as well

 

[Snackbar]

ok, so the Fed should tell Texas to piss off then. they want the profits from fracking, they can handle the water shortages it caused.

Man made droughts are not a new phenomena though, there have been countless droughts caused by agriculture through the years. Should those instances be denied relief as well?

Texas was stupid with their water management in the face of a dry year, i think we can all agree.

The conservative in me irks at bailing out anyone, individual, corporation or state, as i said earlier they probably wont learn anything from this.

But the gun nut in me irks at punishing the whole for the mistakes of a few.

Im glad im not a politician, i would do a terrible job.

 

[7437]

Man made droughts are not a new phenomena though, there have been countless droughts caused by agriculture through the years. Should those instances be denied relief as well?

Texas was stupid with their water management in the face of a dry year, i think we can all agree.

The conservative in me irks at bailing out anyone, individual, corporation or state, as i said earlier they probably wont learn anything from this.

But the gun nut in me irks at punishing the whole for the mistakes of a few.

Im glad im not a politician, i would do a terrible job.

it is not the mistakes of a few though. its the government that Texas elected, enforcing the will of the Texan people. its not even punishing them, it is just not actively giving them money for hurting themselves.

 

[Snackbar]

it is not the mistakes of a few though. its the government that Texas elected, enforcing the will of the Texan people. its not even punishing them, it is just not actively giving them money for hurting themselves.

I hear what your saying, the older i get the more i roll my eyes at collective blame in politics though.
Majority voters in texas probably support their governments decisions in regards to oil and gas because they see it at the base level as economic growth and stability. They dont wonder how the politicians would deal with a situation like this when they are at the ballot box, although they should.

Isnt texas actually a pretty split state too? Like 55% republican 45 % dems?
As much as i hate liberals should they suffer through an unaided drought because they lost?

Im really just thinking out loud here, i dont know how they should deal with this situation, i know it could have been avoided through regulation without hurting the oil and gas sector.

 

[VulgarSnaps]

This state does not allow dissent against oil and gas.

They will throw a good deal of low dollar fines out if needed, but oil and gas wins.

I know a good number of people with large acreage, no mineral rights though!

 

[VulgarSnaps]

you killed the incentive for the ambitious.
.

Sorry, but this is bullshit. You need not be concerned with the ambitious.

I am currently using disability coverage, and will be for the next 3-4 months. I have conditions that would qualify me for ssd.

That shit ain't enough. I'll probably be working from home, 95% of the time, for the rest of my life, but I'll be working.

If there's a large volume of people lacking ambition, well, I figure a large amount of them just don't know how much better it can get, or what path to take to get on a better track.

TX shifts the burden of taxation to consumers. IE, Sales tax and property tax. 8.5% on sales, guess who pays equally? Everyone. Property is taxed according to value/zoning, and fixed percentages with no scale. Distribution is largely county based. Our county commissioners work.

Good - it's objectively fair.
Bad - Area with less money, super low cost of living, and cheap property(common), yields shit funding for local schools.

Seems like the folks at HUD are working on that though, there's a lot of community to community relocation. It sucks.

 

[7437]

I hear what your saying, the older i get the more i roll my eyes at collective blame in politics though.
Majority voters in texas probably support their governments decisions in regards to oil and gas because they see it at the base level as economic growth and stability. They dont wonder how the politicians would deal with a situation like this when they are at the ballot box, although they should.

Isnt texas actually a pretty split state too? Like 55% republican 45 % dems?
As much as i hate liberals should they suffer through an unaided drought because they lost?

Im really just thinking out loud here, i dont know how they should deal with this situation, i know it could have been avoided through regulation without hurting the oil and gas sector.

fed should demand a plan to mitigate further man made droughts before releasing relief funds. seems pretty straight forward. bailing out a bad plan once is fine, but you have to make sure that there is a plan to prevent the same issue in the future.